News, analysis, and information on Minnesota's political campaign season from a DFL perspective, with all the snarky wonkishness you can handle.

Friday, May 05, 2006

Continuations and Polls

I was going to put this at the bottom - but if anyone - and I mean ANYONE who reads this - has a membership to Rasmussen Reports and would be willing to share the results of their latest Senate/Governor polls for Minnesota, I would be greatly appreciative and would of course give full attribution and credit. Rasmussen's Premium Membership is expensive, but sharing is so nice. Anyway, on with the real post.

As a continuation of my previous post on party officers and how we get the best people where they need to be, here are some more thoughts. It seems apparent that we do need people who are organized, professional, and creative in positions to get the most out of our party organizations. It also seems apparent that the people most likely to volunteer for these positions do not necessarily fill those criteria, but rather are those who have the most time to give to the cause. There should be ways for us to respect the old guard's leadership and experience while still involving younger Dems with new ideas and, as it is said, verve.

Several successful corporations have used the "fast-track" approach with employees - successful young professionals are identified early in their careers, and targetted for increased responsibilities with the goal of grooming them for leadership positions down the road. I believe a similar approach can be taken in political circles - identify young, vigorously involved, creative people early on, and always keep them in mind for increased responsibilities. Give them the SD newsletter, or house party coordination, with the goal of quickly moving them into a more important position soon. If they stay put, by the time they're 30, they know the ins and outs of party organization and can really kick some tail.

Additionally, in some cases it seems obvious that the party must take on the trappings of a campaign in and of itself, but at other times is more of a social networking apparatus. Is it possible for us to codify the times at which these moda operandi should occur? My thought is this - odd years contain more social networking, volunteer opportunities not directly related to campaigns, and even (read: election) years take on a more professional, regimented effort, putting together all the connections made in the last year in an organized fashion.

This is obviously a very high-level idea, incorporating exactly zero specifics. Each BPOU will be different. But coming up with these or other ideas now will pay dividends down the road. I also owe someone a phone call about this; I'll be making that call later - you know who you are :-)